Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

857477459 t1_is14ql1 wrote

This is a huge problem in the US if you ask me. The best and brightest that middle America produces are sucked away to a few coastal cities. It's a massive driver of inequality within the US and with WFH it doesn't have to be this way anymore.

3

tacoito t1_is1k3gt wrote

It's hard to compare a small city/town in middle America with somewhere like San Francisco. In your 20s & 30s I craved diversity of experiences, which the major coastal cities offer more easily than middle America.

6

857477459 t1_is1me6p wrote

San Francisco isn't even that great. Few would choose to move there if not for the high salaries. Hell, few would even have the choice since it's unaffordable to anyone not making 6 figures.

4

tacoito t1_is1t7im wrote

What's your personal experience with San Francisco?

1

857477459 t1_is21r7f wrote

In the week I've spent in SF I saw more homeless people than the 22 years I spent living in Tennessee. It's not just about looks though, I was accosted multiple times while just minding my own business. There's also just not a lot to do compared to larger cities. It feels very monotone. You got the rich people and the homeless and not much in-between.

7

tacoito t1_is239is wrote

I currently live in SF, I walk everywhere, and I have not found this to be the case.

Where were you staying? There are plenty or homeless in certain areas, but like every major city I've lived in, I avoid those areas...

I assume you dont take vacations to the worst areas in West Memphis?

1

857477459 t1_is249h2 wrote

I was staying around Fisherman's warf the first time and downtown the second. I was attacked by a homeless person at the McDonald's across the street from Pier 45 which is a major tourist area.

But ignore that point for a second. The real question is how is SF better than a city in the South like Nashville or Charlotte? And even if you think it's better is it THAT much better to pay 3x as much for a house?

5

tacoito t1_is24xss wrote

Ya, that's believable. Sorry about your experience. There are a few unhinged homeless in that area. I've never seen anyone physically attacked, but I've heard stories.

0

857477459 t1_is25c89 wrote

I added more to my post BTW. That's the real question I have.

1

tacoito t1_is2eu26 wrote

See above 👆

I haven't lived in Charlotte or Nashville. Visiting a city for weeks doesn't give me enough experience to talk about living there.

Of the cities I mentioned above, I've enjoyed SF and SD the most, by a wide margin, for the reasons I stated.

Personally, since I have no kids and I'm under 50, the pros of living in SF with higher cost of living is worth it to me.

Another thing to consider. Buying and renting in SF are 2 different scenarios. I can rent an apartment in SF for 50% or what the mortgage would be. In Chicago, rent is 125% of what a mortgage would be.

I'm not prepared to purchase a condo/house in SF, burlt renting is worth it to me.

2

waitingforgoodoh OP t1_is1x3h6 wrote

I grew up in cincinnati, lived in SF and now live in Brooklyn

I love Cincinnati, but there are several things that make living in NYC much better for me at this time in my life (i'm 31) --

- There are simply more people and that means there are more ambitious and interesting people too. Because you are in a small area it is easy to bump into them

- Because ppl from elite colleges tend to congregate in a handful of cities, lots of your friends and friends of friends end up there if you went to one of these schools, so you have a better social life which is very important to me

- The jobs are much higher paying and even tho cost of living is very expensive you end up saving way more anyway (if you are in a highly paid industry)

​

That said it's obnoxious when people dismiss smaller cities / towns, I think the quality of food and culture is just as high in many places as it is in New York, it's just the scale that is different. I think the divide here is bad for society overall

2

waitingforgoodoh OP t1_is1x7jb wrote

I did not like SF because it felt quite monocultural (tech) and not as fun to walk around as NYC is, but has all the problems that NYC has and more

3

tacoito t1_is22uf4 wrote

I'm from a small town in FL

I've lived in:

  • Portsmouth, NH (2yrs)
  • Boston (2 yrs)
  • San Diego (4 yrs)
  • Chicago (4 yrs)
  • Tampa (5 yes)
  • SF (currently)

I understand the value of the small towns/cities. You can find happiness and a niche virtually anywhere. Also, city livability is shaped by a wealth of subjective preferences.

I find that the majority of people I've interacted with that hate on a particular city, don't live in the city at all. They haven't immersed themselves in the neighborhoods, don't explore, and can't deal with a particular element (cost of living, crime, politics, race, traffic, etc.).

To say SF isn't that great because it's unaffordable is missing the plot. If you removed "affordability" from the equation, a majority of people would chose to live somewhere like San Francisco due to it's intrinsic value.

  • Temperate weather
  • Breathtaking topography
  • Excellent public transit
  • Proximity to Wine Country
  • Diversity of culture (visitors from near/far)
  • Successful major sports markets (not exactly intrinsic)
  • Proximity to Ski/snowboarding (Tahoe)
  • Watersports/Sailing/Golf/Hiking/Biking

Those "best/brightest" have the mobility (through scholarships, salary, or generational wealth) that allows them to move to a place that has more intrinsic (albiet subjective) value.

Those smaller markets like Cincinnati, that don't have those same intrinsic qualities that make a coastal city more valuable to the majority of people, compete with markers like SF with lower cost of living, less traffic, up and coming food scenes, etc.

Earlier in my 20's I wasn't able to afford to live in SF. Now that I am able, I have found that SF does not suck.

6

_SoigneWest t1_is2w5fb wrote

> I find that the majority of people I've interacted with that hate on a particular city, don't live in the city at all.

Nor have ever lived there. Or have lived in a suburb of that city but not the city itself.

Edit: words

1

Kickstand8604 t1_isaskcj wrote

Been this way for 150 years. Farmer has 7 kids, let's say 1 die to a childhood disease, 2 become farmers themselves, one takes over the family farm, and the rest move to the big cities cause they can't find work...as technology progresses, those same farmers have fewer kids. So today, a farmer has 3 kids, 1 stays to be a farmer and 2 go to the cities cause you can't find work when the only things in town are a gas station, small diner and grocery store

1